Give money to eye research instead of buying ‘jewelry’

Re “In the Blink of an Eye, a Permanent Twinkle” (Aug. 23): It is ludicrous to me that a prominent eye surgeon like Dr. Robert Maloney would agree to implant a “jewel” in a delicate organ like an eye. Why tamper with anything as delicate and precious as the eye, especially since there have been no formal studies on the safety of eye jewelry?

Anyone with $3,900 sitting in their pocket would do better to give this money for eye research. The “sparkle” or “twinkle” should come from a smile or good deed, not a jewel in the eye.

Nina Meyers

North Hills

*

Instead of having sparkling eyes as a result of joy, we will now have our been-there-done-that dead eyes “adorned” with artificial sparkle. Just as tattoos and body piercings do little to enhance the lives of these pathetic searchers for meaning and acceptance, participants will be gawked at as weirdos.

But, of course, a new law will have to be enacted to ensure that employers don’t discriminate against these folks with wacky hair or tongue piercings. What’s cool at 25 is idiotic at 45 and regrettable at 65.

Stephany Yablow

North Hollywood